Old Time Grizzly Guns

For those that lived among bears, I'd imagine the ol 3030 was a great tool to use. Hell of a lot better than a string and a string or a clumsy front stuffer.

Men concerned with survival don't often concern themselves with headstamps.
 
Slooshark1 said:
I don't think the 30-30 is a suitable whitetail cartridge, let alone for Grizz. Hoyt's right. What happened back then isn't best practice today. If I had to defend myself against a grizz with a 30-30 or nothing, that would be the only time I would.
Click to expand...


Myself I don't know anything about an 'adequate grizzly cartridge' but it's the bee's knee's for WT deer IMHO.
 
Yes in most cases the 30-30 will work. Just like a cheap fishing will work for most of your fishing requirements. They will only let you down on the biggest deer or biggest fish you've ever seen.
 
Slooshark1 said:
Yes in most cases the 30-30 will work. Just like a cheap fishing will work for most of your fishing requirements. They will only let you down on the biggest deer or biggest fish you've ever seen.
Click to expand...

Like many things in the world, it's most often the user of the tool and knowing your own current limitations versus the equipment IMO.

BTW, that was the biggest WT deer I have personally ever seen and it was cleanly taken on the very same day friend.

Cheers
 
mike Crawford said:
I was fascinated with bear hunting long before the internet came along for sure .. I have read alot of the older magazines ,,, anything that had a bear hunting story in it .. I would say back 40-50 years ago according too the writers the gun of choice was the 45-70 for up close and personal .. in those days( according too the writers ) and I would think bullets have came a long way .. If a griz was shot with a 300 win mag at very close range the bullet would fragment and not retain a lot of bullet weight .. but at 150-200 yards would work a lot better ,, from what I could take from this is that the 300 was too fast at point blank too stay together with the bullets they had then anyway ,, the 30-06 was rated very high also for close and personal .. But it always stuck in my head that a 45-70 a very old cartridge was rated so high as too be one of the top choices for close and personal bear protection and followed by the 12 gauge loaded with slugs and SSG .. but no where did I see mention of small caliber guns
Click to expand...

45-70 is popular due to penetration. A slower, heavier projectile penetrates better. Some tests have shown a 500gr from 45-70 at 1600fps will out penetrate the same bullet from a 458 win mag at like 2100fps (at least into wet newspaper). My guess is the slower projectile doesn't mushroom or upset as much. This means they punch a deep hole, but the energy transfer (which IMO is what causes quick kills) just isn't there in comparison.

Think about it. If a 45-70 will shoot straight through a bear, but a 458wm won't, that 458wm must be dumping a lot more energy into the animal. (Not saying a 458 won't penetrate a bear, just using it for comparison sake)
 
Slooshark1 said:
Yes in most cases the 30-30 will work. Just like a cheap fishing will work for most of your fishing requirements. They will only let you down on the biggest deer or biggest fish you've ever seen.
Click to expand...

Dragging a set up for ocean tuna will not help you catch more walleye in northern saskatchewan.
And a deer is a deer, no matter the size of the rack the body will only be so big and so tough. And a 30 cal bullet going a few thousand fps will kill it.
 
Suther said:
45-70 is popular due to penetration. A slower, heavier projectile penetrates better. Some tests have shown a 500gr from 45-70 at 1600fps will out penetrate the same bullet from a 458 win mag at like 2100fps (at least into wet newspaper). My guess is the slower projectile doesn't mushroom or upset as much. This means they punch a deep hole, but the energy transfer (which IMO is what causes quick kills) just isn't there in comparison.

Think about it. If a 45-70 will shoot straight through a bear, but a 458wm won't, that 458wm must be dumping a lot more energy into the animal. (Not saying a 458 won't penetrate a bear, just using it for comparison sake)
Click to expand...

Energy transfer doesn't kill but a big hole with lots of bleeding does.
 
Suther said:
45-70 is popular due to penetration. A slower, heavier projectile penetrates better. Some tests have shown a 500gr from 45-70 at 1600fps will out penetrate the same bullet from a 458 win mag at like 2100fps (at least into wet newspaper). My guess is the slower projectile doesn't mushroom or upset as much. This means they punch a deep hole, but the energy transfer (which IMO is what causes quick kills) just isn't there in comparison.

Think about it. If a 45-70 will shoot straight through a bear, but a 458wm won't, that 458wm must be dumping a lot more energy into the animal. (Not saying a 458 won't penetrate a bear, just using it for comparison sake)
Click to expand...

exactly why the 30 30 does so well with cup and core bullets. not enough speed to rip a bullet to shreds like a 270. so you get more weight retention and penetration.
 
Anything that sends a black bear, moose, elk for a dirt nap is going to do the same for a grizzly and they have for a long time, end of story. Put the bullet where it needs to go, but you won't catch me stalking a grizzly with a 44-40 in close, fk that!
 
I also read a lot of hard books way back in the day .. Ben East wrote a book called ""Bear attacks "" Or at least I believe that was the name of the book as a guy borrowed it and never returned it :))) But anyway in that book it said that a 223 would kill the biggest bear that ever walked .. but that did not make it a bear gun . I am not real sure why people want too hunt with the smallest caliber or least powerful gun possible .. Maybe because grandpa killed a moose or bear with a 44-40 they want too do that too.. But today we have way better choices .. I wanted too do a griz hunt when I was younger and did a pile of research on this ,
Griz have been killed by the 30-30 and 38-55 and 44-40 for sure ,, And a very large Griz was killed by an Native woman with a 22 also .. I seen pictures of that very bear she killed ... The older guns were considered a big step up from a black powder gun for sure that took three minutes too reload ,, today you can still kill a bear with with one .. But I doubt a guide would take you on a griz hunt if you showed up with a 30-30 ,, Or even a 45-70 for that matter ,, As most hunting is done at longer range so the guide can save your ass if you miss and the bear charges .. And he most likely will not be carrying a 30-30 either
 
Gibbs505 said:
Energy transfer doesn't kill but a big hole with lots of bleeding does.
Click to expand...

Mind if I ask for some clarification? Are you trying to say its all about penetration and caliber to create the biggest hole possible, or that a higher velocity round tends to create a larger temporary cavity which in turn causes a bigger hole with more bleeding? Both arguments have some merit, Im just not sure which side you are arguing for in that statement?
 
heronfish said:
Dragging a set up for ocean tuna will not help you catch more walleye in northern saskatchewan.
And a deer is a deer, no matter the size of the rack the body will only be so big and so tough. And a 30 cal bullet going a few thousand fps will kill it.
Click to expand...

Tell that to the mule deer in BC's interior...

Also, technically a few is at least 3. You may wish to rephrase that to a couple thousand FPS...

mike Crawford said:
I also read a lot of hard books way back in the day .. Ben East wrote a book called ""Bear attacks "" Or at least I believe that was the name of the book as a guy borrowed it and never returned it :))) But anyway in that book it said that a 223 would kill the biggest bear that ever walked .. but that did not make it a bear gun . I am not real sure why people want too hunt with the smallest caliber or least powerful gun possible .. Maybe because grandpa killed a moose or bear with a 44-40 they want too do that too.. But today we have way better choices .. I wanted too do a griz hunt when I was younger and did a pile of research on this ,
Griz have been killed by the 30-30 and 38-55 and 44-40 for sure ,, And a very large Griz was killed by an Native woman with a 22 also .. I seen pictures of that very bear she killed ... The older guns were considered a big step up from a black powder gun for sure that took three minutes too reload ,, today you can still kill a bear with with one .. But I doubt a guide would take you on a griz hunt if you showed up with a 30-30 ,, Or even a 45-70 for that matter ,, As most hunting is done at longer range so the guide can save your ass if you miss and the bear charges .. And he most likely will not be carrying a 30-30 either
Click to expand...

Totally agree with the 30-30 statement. As for the 45-70, I think that depends on whether you show up with a box of Remington factory ammo, designed to be safe in a 100+year old trapdoor springfield, or you bring a box of buffalo bore 400+ grain ammo. As long as you know the trajectory of the round, the 45-70 is plenty capable within reasonable ranges with the right ammo. (And yes I know millions of buffalo have been slayed with loads similar to the Rem factory ammo, but there is big difference between slaughtering buffalo in the 1800s and safely and humanely hunting grizzly in 2016.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom